I keep hearing about how President Obama is really a closet Republican or some sort of tool for Wall Street.
Then I read this article from The Hill.
More below the fold...
The article talks about how those Wall Street executives are now turning to Mitt Romney.
According to a review of fundraising data, 67 people who work in the financial sector and live in the New York City metro area gave to Obama in 2008 and to the former Massachusetts governor in 2011.
The reversals come in the wake of Obama's tough rhetoric on Wall Street — most notably last year, when the president was pushing Congress to pass what has become known as the Dodd-Frank financial reform law.
So what do some of these executives say?
One Wall Street executive, who requested anonymity, said he and some of his colleagues feel betrayed by Obama.
"Everybody I speak to is on the same boat — disappointment," said the source, who contributed to Obama three years ago and is now backing Romney.
The executive said he and others on Wall Street have taken exception to Obama's rhetoric about the wealthy, especially because the president has asked rich donors to fork over $35,800 to his reelection efforts.
"It's not healthy for rich people to feel maligned," the executive said.
No, this isn't parody from The Onion. Let that statement sink in.
They feel maligned because the President wants their tax cuts to expire to President Clinton levels!!!!!
Really. I'd think that they'd have stronger support for someone who always sides with them or who has their best interests at heart.
Bonus
This is not related to the above but sure is hilarious. This is from the Washington Post. Richard Dawkins was asked to comment about Rick Perry's statements about evolution. Here is just a bit of what he had to say:
A. There is nothing unusual about Governor Rick Perry. Uneducated fools can be found in every country and every period of history, and they are not unknown in high office. What is unusual about today’s Republican party (I disavow the ridiculous ‘GOP’ nickname, because the party of Lincoln and Theodore Roosevelt has lately forfeited all claim to be considered ‘grand’) is this: In any other party and in any other country, an individual may occasionally rise to the top in spite of being an uneducated ignoramus. In today’s Republican Party ‘in spite of’ is not the phrase we need. Ignorance and lack of education are positive qualifications, bordering on obligatory. Intellect, knowledge and linguistic mastery are mistrusted by Republican voters, who, when choosing a president, would apparently prefer someone like themselves over someone actually qualified for the job. [...]
The population of the United States is more than 300 million and it includes some of the best and brightest that the human species has to offer, probably more so than any other country in the world. There is surely something wrong with a system for choosing a leader when, given a pool of such talent and a process that occupies more than a year and consumes billions of dollars, what rises to the top of the heap is George W Bush. Or when the likes of Rick Perry or Michele Bachmann or Sarah Palin can be mentioned as even remote possibilities.
OUCH!!! But let's face it: that is the alternative to President Obama in 2012.
Ideology is not the factor; basic competence matters...or at least should.